S E E D E D C O N T E N TThe New Yorker has details of the sexual misconduct allegations made in a letter that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) referred to the FBI.
“The allegation dates back to the early nineteen-eighties, when Kavanaugh was a high-school student at Georgetown Preparatory School, in Bethesda, Maryland, and the woman attended a nearby high school. In the letter, the woman alleged that, during an encounter at a party, Kavanaugh held her down, and that he attempted to force himself on her. She claimed in the letter that Kavanaugh and a classmate of his, both of whom had been drinking, turned up music that was playing in the room to conceal the sound of her protests, and that Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She was able to free herself.”
“Although the alleged incident took place decades ago and the three individuals involved were minors, the woman said that the memory had been a source of ongoing distress for her, and that she had sought psychological treatment as a result.”
The plot thickens.
Is there a police report or any documentation that such a incident took place, other than a decades old hearsay account that may or may not have happened that backs her story up? Sounds like that hateful witch Feinstein is reaching for any straws she can to try to keep herself any sort of relevant! The law says Kavanaugh is still innocent until proven guilty. I doubt anybody can. Just something else for progressive leftist libs to foam at the mouth on.
What bothers me is that supposedly Feinstein was in possession of this letter for months and is only just now turning it over to the FBI. This really has all the makings of a Democratic plant to falsely accuse Kavanaugh of something to derail his nomination.
Timing JUST A LITTLE SUSPICIOUS!
That's what bothers a lot of Dems, too. If she had released this in July when she received it, it could have been fully investigated before the hearings.
When could it have been timed so as not be suspicious to you?
And you're not?
Sure could have. The woman could have stepped up some 30 years ago, or at any time in between then and now. I would have thought that when Kavanaugh was going through prior confirmation hearings would have been a GREAT time.
Sorry, I don't buy into the he said/she said bullshit, especially after 30+ years.
Well said!
Conservative men in particular tend to minimize such claims and demonize the victims, so I can see why women have been so reluctant to come forward after a sexual assault.
However the victim has now come forward and the claim does sound credible, and does have some 3rd party support from her husband and their couple's therapist from sessions in 2012. However the other 3rd party whom she claims intervened during the attempted rape denies that he was there.
That's never bothered your side before when a dem gets accused of this sort of thing. Sorry, you have to play by the rules your side established for Dems -- if there's an accusation it's considered true no matter what evidence may or may not be presented (in this case quite a few years of discussing this with husband and counselors, well before Kavanaugh was nominated for a SC seat).
And I still don't buy it.
Seems like Feinstein didn't either until she was sure the confirmation was going to take place.
And just how would you even have a clue as to what my side is? Whether you like it or not, the law of the land still says innocent until proven guilty and applies to all. So far there has been no proof submitted and a accusation is still hearsay and is not admissible in court or considered evidence. It is a fact. Deal with it.
Supportive claims from folks who weren't there - were not witnesses - did not know either of the accused personally.
Yup - sounds an awful lot like heresay - whatcha think?
they simply buy her story because no woman has ever made up a story about being raped, right?
New rules "doc." Allegations like this are taken seriously unless proven otherwise. This is the result of generations upon generations of women being ignored, shamed, denigrated and turned into targets for coming forward so, live with it.
And no man has ever denied the rape he definitely committed, right?
And there it is again.... rightwingers thinking they're "mysterious." It is hilarious to behold.
I never said that.
Did you think that is what I meant?
LMAO!
No, serious allegations are taken seriously.
well, I am a woman so....I ain't buying it. In fact, all these last minute, he said she said from 25-35 years ago that are a last ditch effort by Dems, are actually setting up to discredit legitimate claims a woman might really have...Congrats, Dems, on delegitimizing future women for your political stunts.
What a phony piece of shit he is
Correction: What a stinking POS she is! A.k.a. Feinstein, there I fixed it for you...
Since Trump and almost all Republicans claim that waterboarding and other forms of torture are legal, ethical, effective and safe, wouldn't it be prudent to waterboard Kavanaugh to see if he confesses to having tried to sexually assault a teenage girl? Particularly given the importance of a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS it seems like a good idea.
You fixed nothing. It is Kavanaugh who is the phony piece of shit. Not Feinstein.
Now someone is claiming that enhanced interrogation techniques were used on Manafort.
How about waterboarding her accuser instead?
Wouldn't that be like waterboarding the victims of 9/11? Why not waterboard the wannabe rapist instead?
Sounds stupid when someone else says it, doesn't it?
That's how I felt reading your post.
Please document your source that says "...almost all Republicans claim that waterboarding and other forms of torture are legal...". I am interested in seeing a reputable and non biased source you claim says this. I highly doubt you can...
You simply reinforced that denial is a terrible thing. Feinstein is one of the most hateful, vindictive, and worthless people in DC, and you have a set of blinders on a mile wide if you refuse to see that!
Do you deny that almost all Republicans voted (at least twice) for presidential candidates who support the use of torture? Sounds like they do indeed support it. In fact various polls show that about 96% of Republicans support the use of torture on at least rare occasions, a full 82% say it's justifiable sometimes or often.
As did I reading yours.
Amusing that I asked you to provide a reputable non biased source, and yet the only one you can come up with is Thomson Reuters, which according to Mediabiasfactcheck,oom is blatantly leftist leaning in nature. Hardly a non biased source. In fact, whenever you have been asked for sources you historically always quote leftist biased sources. In answer to your question above, yes I do deny it. You just stated a poll result. As you very well know, poll results are very much dependent on who commissioned the poll to begin with, regardless whether left or right wing. You stated "various polls...". You did not state the source of your polls. Nice try, but you get a no cigar on this one.
As far as I can tell, you're the only one who brought up waterboarding a victim. BTW, dunking was a way of finding out if people, especially women, were telling the truth or for being "scolds" so it seems you were channeling some very archaic and bizarre practices.
He is the only one who brought it up.
Do you consider waterboarding to be an "enhanced interrogation technique"?
And did you read post 2.1.1? Or 2.1.3?
Get back to me when you figure it out which posters brought up waterboarding and enhanced interrogation.
Here's a great big hint for you:
It WASN'T me!!!
Please pay attention.
SMMFH
No. It would not. They are confirmed victims. This woman is not.
You didn't think he would admit to it, did you?
It's Clarence Thomas all over again
For it to possibly have any effect though, the woman is going to have to come forward. Anonymous charges won't get far.
He said/she said some 30+ years ago won't amount to anything.
Ridiculous ploy by Democrats, determined to stop the inevitable which even astute Democrats know they can't.
Do you have proof that the allegations are not true?
As you well know, the burden of proof is on the accuser--not the accused.
You know this is bullshit--y'all are just hoping something--ANYTHING--sticks so MAYBE Kavanaugh won't get confirmed.
See you next week after he IS confirmed!
proof they are?
It was it's just that nobody gave a fuck
Can you believe that Ginny Thomas called Anita Hill in the not too distant past and expected an apology to her husband?
I would have told her to go fuck herself
It's too bad that the Senate Judiciary committee didn't hear from the several other women whom Thomas had harassed.
It's also interesting that just one day after the claim against Kavanaugh was made public there are letters from something like 65 women supporting Kavanaugh. Sounds like the GOP was already aware that there was a sexual assault claim lurking against him and manufactured a defense in advance.
It's a brilliant ploy by calculating bastards.
Kavanaugh's guilt will never be questioned by the hyper-emotional fundamentalists of the Church of the Raving Left. So after he's confirmed, this nonsense will be used as a campaign weapon for the next 5 election cycles.
Regular, everyday people who care more about soccer practice than politics are going to go fuzzy on the details, so when the fundamentalist knocks on their door to secure their vote, they'll say "Well you know Senator Thingamabobby voted to put an accused rapist on the Supreme Court."
No. So, now what?
There were at least 3 other women (including Angela Wright) who were willing to testify against Thomas but the judiciary committee never followed up. Unfortunately that was the standard of the era.....women's claims of sexual harassment were trivialized or ignored even when the victim was entirely credible like Anita Hill.
Credible like Hill??
HA!
She moved with Thomas to another job. She also gave him a ride to the airport.
Sounds like two things an sexually harassed woman would do, right?
You mean like what several of Bill Cosby's victims did after he sexually assaulted them the first time? It seems rather common for a variety of reasons but it's good to see that conservatives still are discrediting and demonizing rape victims.
WTF are you deflecting to Cosby for?
Is Cosby about to be confirmed as a member of SCOTUS?
What on God's green earth does Bill Cosby have to do with this case????
Sure. Sixty-five women who claim that Kavanaugh didn't try to rape them. What more "evidence" do you need?
I find those 65 letters to be far more convincing that one anonymous woman claiming something 30+ years later.
I didn't accuse him of anything.
And I didn't say you did.
But the woman did, and I have yet to see any proof.
If you have any, it would be great to see!
Without it, the woman's story isn't credible to me.
Especially 30+ years later.
Ford, a 51-year-old registered Democrat who has published in academic journals and has trained students in clinical psychology, described the alleged incident in The Washington Post on Sunday, saying it occurred during a summer day in the 1980s at a Maryland house where teens had gathered. Ford claimed she headed upstairs to a bathroom when she was suddenly pushed onto a bed, as rock-and-roll music blared.
However, Ford told The Post she did not recall exactly who owned the house, how she came to be at the house, or how the gathering was arranged. She remembered only that the house was in Montgomery County, near a country club, and that parents were not present.
Yeah, so?
She has come forward and I know that's the only reason Feinstein held onto the letter until now - why say anything if the woman doesn't come forward?
Sounds like the woman may have been intoxicated, if she can't remember all of that on what was supposedly the worst night of her life!
You don't know that so that sentence should have started, "I believe...."
Seems you only apply that principle to people you support. I've never once seen you say, for example, that Leeann Tweeden had to prove that Franken forced a kiss on her or actually touched her when that dumb photograph was taken.
And you haven't heard me say anything about AL Franken and his accusers.
Your "seems you" meme is incorrect and has nothing to do with this discussion, but thanks for deflecting again! Now, if you have any proof on THIS case, by all means, bring it on!
Every time I have asked for it, I get crickets. Maybe you can be the one who is different!
It was only a matter of time til I read that stupid jackassian line. For the love of God, HOW do you prove something DIDN'T happen? That isn't even reasonably. She made the claim, therefore the burden of proof is on her to prove that it did. How old are you?
Ah yes the memory was so fresh like she just made it up yesterday.
I'm sure the left is not going to win over any Republicans to vote against Kavanaugh with stupid allegations like this. If anything they are distancing them.
The thing is other than getting a few left-wing extremist panties in a knot and giving the sheep something to bleat about, this will go nowhere.
I'll bet if you'd been held down, had your mouth covered to prevent anyone from hearing your screams (not to mention impair your breathing, having your clothing torn off and thought you were about to be raped--which was only interrupted by someone else jumping on--I think you'd remember that for a long time, as in the rest of your life.
Yeah I'm sure I would even remember the year and month.
Yeah, you would....unless the trauma was so severe that you repressed the memory entirely which is very unlikely.
Yeah!
It's ridiculous to imagine that getting raped might be memorable....
Man, she seems to have "recovered" the memory now, huh?
Gee, I wonder what "triggered" such a miraculous recovery?
As ridiculous as not remembering what was supposedly the most horrifying, tragic night of her life?
Why don't you tell us all about being raped?
2012 ?
Rape | Definition of Rape by Merriam-Webster
1: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception — compare sexual assault, statutory rape
What else can I look up for you?
2016 would probably have been a better guess.
probably sometime in November.
how bout my #?
I don't know Tex,
when you write like that
I feel all wobbly in the knees area.
What are you up to later...?
not according to her therapist
Please try to pay attention.
"What else can I look up for you" was CLEARLY and PRECISELY not addressed to you.
But if you need some help, I will try. What specifically do you need?
Well Tex,
I'm guessin I'm sorta like you in the rape seen these daze.
I doubt, either one of us has too much experience, butt
I'm willing to give it a whirl,
what do you think I might learn, if I wasn't brought up a very capable individual, physically and mentally, when it comes to being special,
as in, I WAS in Special Ed, but not the kind you would be hoping.
I was fortunate to be a very physically fit individual, and was self uneducated enuff, to not wind up in prison.
I did, and would, not ever wish to be incarcerated, but I would survive just fine, but, I can tell you, male RAPE can be as devastating and sometimes worse, than that of female Rape.
My father taught in a few prisons, and Detention Centers , and witnessed the results, not the actual act.
It severely damaged some, and some even took their own lives.
So, unless your willing to give it a try, I believe you should not bark so LOUD on this subject.
.
Anything else you be wishing to explain to me this mourning ?
I don't try to explain anything to you.
Why would I waste my time on such a fruitless endeavor?
Your personal experience, since you claim to know how to identity a real or fake victim.
I often ask myself that, with each fruitless endeavor you embark upon, whence responding to moi.
You can ignore me, as I am quite difficult to deal with, if that is my mood, but c'mon Tex, as weird as my weighs Be, there be some wisdom occasionally scattered about
like my thoughts, that weigh my wait of impatience, causing me
to be
my own greatest pain in the neck
,
so I try to lessen my burden, by using my concentration disability, to out do others disabilities, cause on certain occasions, I do, sometimes excel at diss ability, and dat ability as well
as my ADD, just doesn't ADD up to me, so I sum it up with division, the multiplication of factors, to see how many times, I can spin a web of distasteful deceit, with whomever I by chance may meet, in the pool, or track, cause I can float on my back while smoking crack, having a heart attack, stepping on a thumb tack, giving a Sugar Smack, a lesson on intolerance,
A
bout diabetics who shun dairy, cause their either cheesy, or tripping, due to them sometimes lacking toes
.
So if you would be so kind, might you please elaborate, on your credentials for understanding ,
the feelings, one might, or might not feel, if they were to fall under your hot dog diggity dictionary definition of non detourable direction pointing and guiding one to thoroughly UNDERSTAND, cause I'm so sure, any one who has ever been violated, just needs a simple definition, and it should be all one should need to comprehend all there is to know about RAPE.
Ponder on that a second, I was a tempting Christ, to be a tad serious, but
whatever Green Tex, cause I do envy the bliss sum seem to miss
Why are you telling that deliberate falsehood?
Show where I claimed such, or your whole post is worthless.
You might have better luck at getting whatever point it is you keep trying to make if you wrote a little clearer instead of the endless play on words.
Just saying, if you want to be taken seriously, then write seriously instead of gobbledygook.
Did he, or did he not pose tis question to ypu above
"Why don't you tell us all about being raped?"
You replied with a dictionary explanation, no ?
I think you owe him an explanation on your RAPE expertise, but that's just lil oh me
Thank You Tex, for the constructive criticism.
.
but,'
lifes already a tad too serious for me
Then we will have to ignore her claim
You go right ahead. It won't count for a goddam thing.
"It won't count"...………………………………..like her claim some 30 years later.
I noticed a certain "Democrat", probably more than just that "Certain" Democrat, didn't follow a supporting constituents wishes of not wanting to be in the "light" for all to see.
Democrats are soooo caring of the little folk ain't they ?
Did you hear about Kavanaugh meeting with Rump's personal attorney on the Mueller investigation? Kamala Harris asked him the question and he wouldn't answer
You fell for that?
sad
Why didn't he answer? Sad
Because it may fall under attorney-client privilege and he would have to ask the lawyer to clear him to speak about it. Did that occur to you at all?
Which doesn't apply if it is used to cover up a crime.
Is there proof that he met with that attorney to discuss the Mueller probe and how to cover up crime regarding it? No, then, attorney-client privilege applies.
He did. Did you not see it? If it wasn't for "Spartacus," she would have been the laughing stock of the hearing. Did you miss where Kavanaugh took her to the woodshed and Harris couldn't provide any specifics about who she imagined Kavanaugh talked to.
And then after the hearing Harris admitted she had no evidence of anything.
I often wonder why Democratic Senators engage in such transparently idiotic lines of questioning that make them look like idiots to anyone whose paying attention. And then I see the left wing fever swamp dwellers parrot the idiocy and I understand why Democrats pander to their base. It works.
So then you admit he met with him? I knew it!
Well if he didn't meet with Rump's attorney why didn't he say so?
Since you pretend to like proof, is there any proof that EITHER of them what acting as an attorney? Hell, I don't think that Kavanaugh even has a license to practice.
Link?
Yeah, why would Kavanaugh even have a license to practice law when he has been a judge since 2006??
If there was a meeting between Trump's lawyer and Kavanaugh where Kavanaugh gave legal advice, then attorney-client privilege applies that is all I was saying.
Wow, a surprisingly cogent comment.
Nope, it does NOT apply. Kavanaugh isn't a lawyer, he's a judge. WTF would Kavanaugh be doing giving legal advice to lawyers who will very likely be coming before the DC court?
BTFW, IF what you claim is TRUE, Kavanaugh would be REQUIRED to recuse himself from any such case if he remains on the DC court.
it is only surprising that people recognized it as such when they usually don't.
Gee, Sean; I've lost count of how many BS claims like that you've made. It's so weird that you keep doing it. Do you hope someday we'll just give up calling you out?
There's a first time for everything
You're arguing with someone who thought there was trench warfare in WWII and that the geography of France completely changed between the two world wars, Mr. F. Just sayin'.
Duh - Kavanaugh wasn't the client - Rump was. Duh.
Why would they need to consult about the Mueller investigation?
Hmmmmm
Yeah, it bothered her so damn much she stayed silent for what, 30+ years? Even though Kavanaugh has been a public figure for at least 17 years?
I'm not buying this weak-ass bullshit.
But I do hope Democrats hyper-focus on this. It will be fun to watch them implode!
Even better the letter just happened to find it's way Diane Feinstein. Wow, talk about the leftist wack job that would be sure to run with it. What a coincidence. Almost like it was planned or something.
I am sure Diane took the time to research if the letter was from a real person; that the information in the letter was accurate; and this isn't some type of political BS maneuver./S
It makes sense to give it to Feinstein. Many women keep their mouths shut after an assault and then something happens (such as this hearing) and they can't keep quiet any longer.
Feinstein might not be the first person I thought of, but it makes sense to me
The fact that this woman lives in CA making Feinstein her senator who is on the judiciary committee couldn't have had anything to do with that?
And now this woman has come forward. Next meaningless, empty attack, please! BTW, once one comes forward, it tends to start a cascade of other women who now feel safe to do so. A rich, entitled prick like Kavanaugh is very likely have done something like more than once. Gird yourself.
Well then I presume that you believe that all of the allegations made about the abuse of the Catholic church is weak-ass bullshit too. HUNDREDS of people coming forward DECADES after they were raped by priests.
Presume whatever you like, and the good thing is, it doesn't have to even make sense or be realistic!
LMFAO!
Weak deflection.
No deflection at all. But I'll be damned if I am going to write a bunch of stuff directed at such a comment.
Does he have any other kind?
It's exactly that kind of dismissive comment that women are fed up with and not going to take anymore. Time's up on that kind of stinking behavior. If that person had a sister or daughter or wife who'd have gone through something like this he damn sure wouldn't be thinking, much less saying, shit like that.
I don't care if they are fed up or not.
"Time's up" should also mean that the time is up for women waiting to report crimes or what they suspect are crimes.
Why subject other women to that criminal behavior?
Maybe you'll think differently* when the votes are counted in November.
*I'm joking, of course. You'd never change your tune.
Did you hear about Kavanaugh dropping his ice cream cone on a public sidewalk when he was 6, and he just LEFT it there?
Oh, the horror!!!!!!!!!!!!
[deleted]
LOL!
Spaaaaaaaaaarticus !
Wheeeeeeere are you !
Trivializing attempted rape. What's next, jokes about mass murders being like stealing candy?
The FBI has already decided there's no "there" there and filed the document. But if the goal was to vaguely and anonymously smear the man's reputation at the 11th hour, mission accomplished I guess. I disagree with Feinstein on some issues, but I generally respect her. This was not her finest moment.
It sounds like she tried to keep it quiet but other Democratic Senators forced her hand. She realized how thin it was and wanted to focus on the legal issues, and her party wanted to go the insinuation and rumor route.
I kind of hope that's true because I would rather be disgusted by other people than her. Still, she could have turned it over to the FBI as soon as she got it, or thrown it away, which is probably what it deserved.
It's a shame she didn't stick to her original position (if my understanding that she was pushed is correct) because Charles Cooke is correct about what she ultimately did:
"What Senator Feinstein is currently doing to Brett Kavanaugh is evil. Yes, it is evil. It is antediluvian. It is dangerous. It is illiberal. It sits well, well outside of the American tradition, harking back to a time in which the accused were simply carted off — or shunned by polite society — ten minutes after someone prominent offered up a vague claim about them. In America, we require that our accusers make themselves known, that their accusations be offered in detail and in public, and that the accused be appraised of everything that has been leveled against them — and we require this not just within formal legal environments, but in general. Within the American tradition, these requirements are considered a prerequisite to fairness — both inside and outside the courtroom. As has become fashionable lately within her party and her state, Senator Feinstein is stamping all over those traditions, and doing so for political advantage."
You couldn't come up with anyone even slightly less far-right bent than him? That would be as if I tried to pass someone like Michael Moore off as a middle-roader.
Feinstein doing "evil." That earns a three-fer:
His words were true, and no amount of left-wing spin can change that fact.
If that's so there's no such thing as false.
Ok. If you choose to believe it, have fun!
So, you're telling me that you just believe what Cooke says which is far different from being true.
Pro Tip: Rather than typing out all that drivel, condense your post to "logical fallacy." It accomplishes the same thing more efficiently.
The woman is a constituent of Feinstein's. Senators do NOT throw away constituent correspondence, especially when they make this type of allegation. BTW, ALL constituent correspondence is CONFIDENTIAL unless and until a waiver is signed. The constituent MAY have waived the release of the letter but NOT the release of her identity. The constituent's identity has been redacted from the letter on file with the FBI and the WH.
So then simply prove him wrong.
Where is the proof?
f you believe that then there's no such thing as a lie in your world.
Was my sentence too long for you? How's this: Charles Cooke is a lying POS.
You might be taken a tiny bit more seriously if you were to actually cite which fallacy was committed rather than just hoping a blanket accusation would do the job. I won't hold my breath for you to attempt it.
You really don't care how ridiculous your BS looks, do you.
[deleted]
Just to highlight how hypocritical the rightwing is (but I repeat myself) on this matter, consider what its reaction would have been if Feinstein had received this information on democratic president's nominee and buried it.
Ah yes the lefts typical what ifs.
Maybe they can get Hillary to start a Kavanaugh birth certificate campaign again?
Or maybe she can tie Kavanaugh into Russian collusion.
All I can say is the song by meatloaf , paradise by the dashboard light , is running through my head , and the thought of how many as teen agers haven't had a situation where heavy "petting" ( yeah I am showing my age), and been with another where NO is uttered after certain stimulation has occurred?
Any guy that has taken a girl to the submarine races , or the back seat of a car at a drive in , is according to some , GUILTY..... even if nothing happened.....
We elected a man who boasted about groping women to be President of the United States.
Why should we not appoint a rapist to the Supreme Court?
Please provide even one shred of credible evidence that Kavanaugh raped anyone.
Hell, even the article doesn't say he raped anyone!
SMH
You're SO right, he just attempted to rape someone.
Never seems to take though.
Prove it then.
Since you claim it, you CAN prove it, right?
Please start by reading my post. I did not say Kavanaugh is guilty. I don't know.
I asked what the problem is with appointing a rapist to the Court, when we had no problem electing a known groper to the Presidency. Do you need proof that Donald Trump boasted of groping?
Yes, I can prove that the article states that he attempted to rape someone. From the article:
That's so cute!
Stupid, but cute!
You've got quite a streak going for thinking rape is funny, Tex.
I see you've moved off the "attempted rape" allegation to create a straw-man of actual rape which has not been alleged (yet---these cases tend to be like taking one's shoes off).
Can you prove Ms. Ford is lying?
Dearest Anonymous,
We miss you..
Signed,
Larry Craig, Mark Foley
An accusation concerning Kavanaugh when he was a teenager? Sounds to me like someone ran out of nerf balls.
Already had testimony. Kavanaugh answered, half answered or didn't answer. Hypotheticals and whatnots.
Kavanaugh doesn't believe in Choice, has a 'strange view' of contraception and seems to 'allude' that politicians---or at least some of them---are too important to be held accountable.
What remains to be known?
Since you state these things as though they are facts, please list what led you to believe that he isn't in favor of choice. I can't find a single ruling that would lead me to believe he is against it, nor in his writings.
What is his "strange" view of contraception? Or that politicians can not be held accountable, what do you base that on?
If you did not watch or --pay attention--to the Senate confirmation hearings, it appears to me that it would be wise to reply nothing, thereby not revealing your lack of understanding on this matter.
Stick with MAGA. It is simpler.
Yeah, I didn't figure you could provide any evidence.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected would happen.
Just once I would like to see proof when people say stuff about Kavanaugh.
Go away. You do not read. You do not comprehend. You do not follow reports. In short, you do nothing except...……….nothing.
Everything is in the senate confirmation hearings. Everything.
Ye, they were, and if what you say is true, it should be QUITE easy for you to prove. I notice THAT didn't happen, though!
can you show us proof where the stuff said about ole Krazy Kavanaugh ,
is false
witness
bare
ing like balls to the wall all greased up like hair dryer after dawn
cracked
like a breakfast beverage, egged on buy
beer or bust, Ted till broke
an
apart, meant, but not
tied loss of win, less a loss or tie ed incorrectly
to what suit, might flush
out
the proof, that stuff said,
is not true
The burned fo ooprf si no eht cacuser.
Awysla.
so you can understand something,
congratz Tex
The fact that Donald Trump nominated him, should be all the proof you need. Not only is Trump pro-life, but in a debate with Hillary Clinton, he stated that he would only nominate SCOTUS candidates who were pro-life.
“The Supreme Court – it’s what it’s all about. Our country is so, just so imperative that we have the right justices,” Trump said. ” I feel that the justices that I am going to appoint– and I’ve named 20 of them. The justices that I’m going to appoint will be pro-life. They will have a conservative bent.“
So show us when and where he has ruled on a case that would lead you to believe he isn't for choice.
Should be a piece of cake, right?
Well, you are right--that isn't a ruling.
And what he said does not indicate how he would vote if he had to.
And yes. you WILL have to wait and see.
he repeatedly has stated that he is big on precedent. Roe is precedent, and it has been confirmed.
You're right. What was I thinking?
He didn't exactly rule against an abortion here but, he did decent the final decision on it.
Rump wanted Marla to abort. I bet he wanted Melania to abort too.
Ironically, Kavanaugh WASN'T on that list of 20. Kavanaugh didn't get added until AFTER Mueller was appointed.
Garza v. Hargan
of course its just another one of those pesky little coincidences that Crazy Kav, has suggested a sitting POTUS should not be charged while in office...
this after chasing Bill Clinton down, like a Bee actor, flying like a Bird, after and into, Jenifer's' Flowers, on Monica's
Tulips .
Then it looks like it is only one understanding!
So, no decisions that would lead anyone to think he would rule to overturn Roe.
Got it, and thanks!
The burden of proof is on the accuser.
Always.
What don't you
stand
under
now?
It would do wonders to read the decision first and then the later dissent.
Kavanaugh never even suggested that the girl couldn't get an abortion.
Did you know that SCOTUS vacated the order of the full D.C court's decision?
I bet you didn't.
[deleted]
Texan, I never said he did, what I did say, as the dissent said was, he wanted to get the states finger prints off of the decision, he wanted that choice to come from friends or, family so that the "government" wasn't involved, in his mind, in an abortion. It does, in a twisted kind of way, show that he was and, is anti-abortion. Whether he really accepts Roe as "settled law" he knows as a SCOTUS justice he can "unsettle" it.
You apparently didn't understand what he wrote.
Inpasse
Dreadls
read lsd
might have sum value
dependent on factors
I could figure
out, or in ill take his letters for a spin
LADDERS!
LOL!
What I don't stand under!
try standing above
He said he was pro-life during the campaign, but I never believed him. Up until he ran for president he was pro-choice.. He only claimed to be pro-life to get the bible thumper vote.
I would bet real money that he's paid for far many more abortions than you and I have ever had
Let me help you, there, Tex. He only had one abortion related case and did he ever step in the shit with it. The case was Garza v Hargan. Normally I'd give you a link to it but am not able to do it on here for some reason.
No, and neither did you because that's not what happened. The initial ruling was from a 3 judge panel (including Kavanaugh) of the D.C. Circuit. The full D.C. circuit reversed his ruling:
In your words, "it would do wonders if you actually" had read the case history in this matter.
[Somehow, the paste function that wouldn't work above is now, mysteriously working]
So, having been taken to school about what Kavanaugh ruled about abortion, you're now trying to find yet another way to dodge the obvious. Really, Tex, you're just not up to the task. Every time you do this you just seem expose yourself further as nothing but a dedicated toady rather than someone who knows things and has principles.
I'll see y'all on Thursday evening after Kavanaugh is confirmed!
Live it up now!
Wow, Tex, you should really hold off making big pronouncements like that. They kind of have a way of making you look ridiculous. Nothing's going to happen this week now that the Judiciary Committee has decided to take her and Kavanaugh's testimony NEXT WEEK.
And even if events hadn't gone this way, Thursday's vote was in the committee to send his nomination to the full Senate for the confirmation. Why don't you know how the process works?
Okay, as much fun as this could be....you gotta be fucking kidding me.
Let me see the hands of everyone that was learning more about themself and sex in Jimmy Smith's garden shed at 16?
This isn't a boys will be boys thing. It was experimentation at youth thing. If it was part of his dna we would have learned about that long before this letter.
When I was approaching adulthood my sage wise mother imparted some wisdom that changed my skirt chasing....
"15 will get you 30"
Now that the victim has come out publicly it does sound more serious than that, at least an attempted rape.
Ehhh, I still don't see it.
this was a hard dick and no social experience. wrapped up in a kid that was probably jacking off to moving snails.
To bring this up, this much later tells me more about her than about him.
At this age everyone tests their limits, feels for the social walls, and tries to survive the raging everything and stay a kid. He has no history of this behavior or we damn sure would have heard that by now.
Sorry she carried around a personal hurt about something in her puberty that didn't go to her plans for a very long time. I'm wondering who in her past took the brunt of that all this time.
There's a two way street here on this one, this feels like some sort of revenge thing is happening we aren't privy to.
I have to agree to disagree with you on this one. You don't force yourself on someone and cover their mouth as they attempt to scream. The only reason she got away was because one of the other assholes jumped on the bed and threw everyone off.
It sounds like they were going to gang rape her.
The reason she came forward sounds like in all good conscience she couldn't forgive herself if she didn't come forward now that this phony piece of shit is up for the Supreme Court.
She's come forward and taken a lie detector test. I believe her. It doesn't sound like revenge to me at all.
Oh goodness! I don't doubt the actions took place exactly as she stated.
It's the timing of the complaint that irks me. She could have come forward at any time in his somewhat anonymous career and pressed the same point and passed the same polygraph.
But it's now that he's about to be voted on for the Supreme court that she comes out....seems to me that she is getting revenge.
Now that she has come forward you can bet that someone knows her favorite soda drink, guys she dated, ANY illicit activity, movies she watched and pizza slices she ate.
This is going to be a race to the bottom now.
I think the realization that her attacker was about to be given a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court was a motivating factor. And I think it was an appropriate response. Had Kavanaugh remained someone relatively obscure without such significant power she might well have left well enough alone.
I love it that Grassley sent out his goons to find 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school who claim he never did that to them. It's a novel defense tactic. I wonder if it would work in a murder trial. The defense could bring in people to testify that the defendant never murdered them.
And I love that Democrats somehow got a letter some 30+years after the alleged "facts" and then sat on it because they didn't deem it important enough to share earlier--kind of like the anonymous woman who made the claim but has not, did not, will not come forward while trashing a fine man.
Sorry, not buying into this bullshit.
You can, and please, run with it!
See ya Thursday after confirmation!
Supposedly this woman wrote a letter to a democratic representative who gave the letter to Feinstein in July, and in it she stated she did not want to be identified, did not want to come forward, and did not want to pursue the matter any farther.
But now, because she has become the anonymous laughing stock of the country, she decides she wants to come forward. She is now stating she feels it is her "civic duty".
I, and most of America, call bullshit on this. It was her LEGAL duty to report this 35 years ago when it allegedly happened, but like so many other last second democratic "revelations", the accuser decides to come out just before an election or confirmation, in this case, a confirmation. She must not have thought it was that important 35 years ago.
This will rightfully be blown off. The FBI even put out a statement that they simply round filed the allegation.
If Republicans think this will be the last of it, get ready for round 3546. The mid terms are only less than 2 months away. Almost guaranteed another "accuser" will come out just before the election, and accuse a Republican candidate of something along the same lines.
I truly think that true Democrats are getting tired of this bullshit also. They will begin to reject the liberal loons that are trying to make this shit relevant and start booting them out of office for more moderate democrats.
Oooo, sorry. Too late for that. You're part of the "bullshit" by virtue of taking no prisoners when it's a Dem or perceived liberal who's been accused. No playing both sides of the net for you no matter how entitled you think you are to do that.
See ya Thursday after Kavanaugh is confirmed.
Maybe - Maybe Not
.
Republican senators call for delay on Brett Kavanaugh vote until they can hear from accuser
.
Of course I'll admit to having a small bit of the radical in me so I can't help but to be rooting for Bitch Karma to slap McConnell on his turtle noggin by holding the Kavanaugh vote up until after the midterms. Then watching the D's take back the Senate in November and then having them tell Trump and the R's, " You've got now got two choices" .
Pull Kavanaugh's nomination and replace it with one for Garland or go without a 9th Supreme Court judge for the final two years of the Trump fiasco.
Well, I guess a third option would be for Trump and the R's to sue the D's for their obviously UN-Constitutional act of stealing a Judgeship from Trump and the folks who voted for him but surely even the R's aren't that disgustingly hypocritical!
Or ARE they!?
See ya Thursday night!
Do you want me to bring ketchup for your crow?
You got proof of me doing that? No?
[Removed]
Not to put a stick in your eye but I don't see it happening at all.
His name's going to get pulled. Even the Republicans are seeing this as a lose/lose situation on him.
If they vote to confirm, they are ignoring women. If they fight, they are against women.
Depending on which observation post the Dems won for different reasons.
Some, like myself, will see the tactic as underhanded but served the intention of stalling a judge pending a new congress.
In it's execution it's pretty clever and unfortunately would be expected as the same approach by the right had the conditions been reversed.
All in all though, I think he's dead in the water now.
well it won't happen now on Thursday unless the Dems shrivel back into their hut...they opened this can of worms, now they have to deal with it...I would love for the hearing to happen on Monday and then if need be - hold them over or have then come back for a special vote...that would be karma. Either way, the vote will be held and he will be on the bench the first of Oct, unless he caves and doesn't "want to defend his integrity"...don't see that happening.
And why would you what with you already being greatly over-supplied with your own stock?
If this were a murder case you'd actually have a body, proof and somebody not waiting a week before an important Senate vote.
But it isn't and your side has decided that no corroborating evidence is necessary or statutes of limitation to hanging someone if it's a dem or anyone you like to label as "liberal."
There's plenty of evidence against Dems and liberals. Right now there's a video of Keith Ellison beating up an ex girlfriend and the left has said nothing about him dropping out of his race for Minn AG.
Besides the woman's "testimony", show what ---IF ANY---"corroborating" evidence you have.
I bet it amounts to NOTHING!
Doesn't matter what we bet....he's dead in the water and millions upon millions of women voters are going to watch which way the Republicans blow with this.
The Dems set the Republicans up...
Oh, yeah, The Dems were so smart!!
You crack me up!
You can crack up all you like....please chuckle away.
Obama led the Republicans in to their own trap time after time. And they chuckled.
Your response says more about the right than you'll ever know.
His name is going to be withdrawn. The Dems will walk away with what they were going for and you can chuckle some more.
Gee, you mean the very same Obama that "led" Democrats to losing 1000 seats while he was President?
THAT Obama?
LMFAO!
You keep getting funnier with each post!
Okay. We'll see who's chuckling next week?
There'll be a lot of chuckling when this circus costs a lot of red state Democrats their seats. The Dems have just motivated all those deplorables and dregs of society that cost them the last election.
hahaha, it's already falling apart, but carry on...it's comical.
If that's true, it's about damned time!
Where? Link to it. You don't for a millisecond think we're just going to take YOUR word for this.
Was that like when you bet that he'd be confirmed by this Thursday? A bit of advice: stay as far away from race tracks and casinos as possible.
I don't have to "carry on" anything...it's Republicans now that are talking about withdrawing the nomination because of "optics".
Seems they are aware that they already have a problem with educated women leaving the party which leaves the gullible and easily duped. It appears they have a lock on them.
Now they're running scared and admitting proceeding is a lose/lose situation.
So...you just chuckle away. His name will likely be buried before the Monday hearing.
She passed a polygraph.
I notice NOBODY from the right is suggesting he take one.
That's not actually "evidence".
No, because they're stupidly unreliable.
More important than a polygraph would be an FBI interview with each of the 3 parties in the room when the attempted rape occurred. That puts each party at risk of committing a felony if they lie.
And WHY would anyone take a polygraph? What purpose would it serve/
If he takes one and passed it, all the left would be screaming that it was somehow rigged, and how DARE we not take the word of an alleged victim some 30+ years later!
Anyone want to tell the author of that comment that it doesn't matter what she believes?
Given how the Democrats are perfectly happy with accused woman beater Keith Ellison representing them, maybe Kavanaugh should announce he's an anti-Semitic black Muslim, in order to win Democratic support.
That's even more embarrassingly desperate for you than usual, Sean. If the woman's story is true or even convinces people that Ellison did this regardless of the lack of evidence, then the remedy is for them to vote him out of office November. There is no such option for the people with regard to Kavanaugh. But keep trying Sean. One day, maybe, with a lot of luck you might accidentally actually come up with a sensible comment or a rational argument. Oh, and you might want to try to leave the lies, character assassination and raging religious and racial bigotry out of it. That really doesn't make you look better.
Guess we shouldn't mention the confirmed white supremacists and Nazis that signed up to run as Republicans eh?
Also a pedophile
Update, Nathan Larson is a pedophile and a white supremacist Republican candidate running in Virginia.
Michael Steele brought up a great point.
You remember Michael Steele don't you? He's the guy the Republicans had to vote 7 times to finally elect him as head of the Republican party when Obama was nominated. Then they did the "We got one too" show. When that scam became obvious they slandered him and threw him out the back door.
He drew the straight line to the Clarence Thomas confirmation and the circus it was...with one distinct thought.
What's the first thing that comes to most people's minds when the name Clarence Thomas is brought up?
Uh huh.....and the Republicans are trying to shove this one through too...except this is a different time and educated women are watching and voting.
That's absolutely the ONLY thing this is about, and I said it a couple of days ago.
We'll be seeing campaign ads for 10 years saying "Senator Soandso voted to put an accused rapist on the Supreme Court."
Well, if that is your singular thought then the rest of this will be way over your head.
I'm sure you would like to think so.
This is simply a political ploy for Democrats.
Hmmmm. I believe I already said that and you scoffed that I would think the Dems were that smart.
Something like "the Republicans got set up.by the Dems" or close to that? Remember?
Which also supports my conclusion about the singular thinking. Thanks for the help.
I've agreed with it twice in the last four comments, so I'm not sure where you're getting "scoffing".
I think you have me confused with somebody else on that one.
You are absolutely correct and I do apologize, I should have paid better attention.
No worries. We're good.
Thank you.
It takes too long for this article to load and I cannot participate or monitor my seed.
Locking.